Case Summary

Did you know that Second Amendment protected rights cover, not just firearms, but also knives? Andrew Teter and James Grell are law-abiding residents of Hawaii who want to own folding pocket-knives with split handles, also known as butterfly knives. But this type of knife was banned years ago by the State of Hawaii. MSLF filed an amicus brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in support of Andrew and James, arguing that Hawaii’s prohibition violates their Second Amendment protected rights to keep and bear arms, since the word “Arms” applies to all arms, including knives and other bladed weapons. 

Join the Fight

Since 1977, MSLF has fought to protect private property rights, individual liberties, and economic freedom. MSLF is a nonprofit public interest legal foundation. We represent clients pro bono and receive no government funding. Make your 100% tax deductible contribution today and join the fight.

Donate Now

Status

Court

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Case History

Butterfly knives were banned years ago in Hawaii, in what was little more than a reaction to old movie images that unfairly associated them with gang and other illegal activity—à la “West Side Story.” The plaintiffs in this case, Andrew Teter and James Grell, are asking the courts to acknowledge that the Second Amendment also protects the right to keep and bear, not just guns, but knives too. 

While Hawaii has broad power to make policy decisions for its residents, Hawaii lacks the authority to completely ban the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, or transportation of butterfly knives.  

Today, firearms are the first thing most of us think of when the term “Arms” is used, for understandable reasons. But a review of the historical record makes clear that the Framers of the Constitution had a much broader definition of the word “Arms” in mind, given the times and circumstances in which they lived. Rudimentary firearms existed then, but were still in their infancy, technology-wise. Battles were fought and personal security was maintained using an array of Arms, including swords, knives, hatchets, and bayonets.

Hawaii’s prohibition on butterfly knives is based on the false premise that folding pocket-knives with split handles, more commonly known as butterfly knives, are only associated with ne’er-do-wells and criminals; not because the knives themselves are inherently more dangerous or more commonly used in crime. 

Not only is the premise behind the ban false, but it’s also beside the point if we take an honest look at the original meaning of the term “Arms” in the Second Amendment.

Mountain States Legal Foundation filed an amicus curiae brief on August 28, 2020. The brief supports Andrew Teter and James Grell, who are challenging the constitutionality of Hawaii’s ban on “butterfly knives,” on the grounds that it violates their Second Amendment-protected right to keep and bear arms.

Case Documents
Explore More

A Sobering Moment for the Second Amendment

Second Amendment supporters were shocked this month when the Supreme Court dismissed all 10 gunowners’ rights cases that were pending, thereby denying all 10 cases a hearing. Earlier this year, gun owners achieved a partial victory at the Supreme Court in a battle against New York City’s unconstitutional carry restrictions. MSLF submitted a brief in that…

The Supreme Court’s 2nd Amendment Misfire

On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to review all ten of the Second Amendment cases it had pending on its docket. Though the cases presented different fact patterns and procedural postures, the Court simply refused to weigh in on any of them. There seems to be one likely reason: Chief Justice Roberts does not want the Court to take a stance on the Second Amendment.

Get the latest updates from MSLF
News Updates